Will there ever be a Democratic landslide again?

[opebo]

No big landslides - too many christians.

[opebo]

Christians split 50/50, moron. Unlike other blocks of voters who split 90/10.

I mean the ones that actually mean it, not the ones who put that nonsense in proper perspective.

[opebo]

What nonsense?

Religion.

[opebo]

I said what nonsense?

And I answered.

[opebo]

As mentioned earlier, Georgia has a Democrat-controlled legislature. So do many other southern states.

I guess you have more of a right than all those people to decide what the Democratic party is?

How are those people different from Republicans?  I suppose having both major parties beholden to political Chrisitanity is a possibility.

[opebo]

They could say, what's the difference between you and a Republican?

Who me?  A revulsion to theocracy I suppose.  I do like the right-wing economics, of course.

[opebo]

I want to make prostitution, drug use, and gambling legal. I want to end the anti- smoking legislation and the FCC.

All good positions, none of which is furthered by voting Republican.

[opebo]

As to opebo, what's your deal with Christians?  Why do you attack us so much?  I don't think you'd attack a racial minority in the same way, constantly.  I don't think you'd let anyone get away with that either.  But you continue to attack Christians, and it's a double standard of yours, a baseless one as well.

I attack any ideology that is intolerant and has the agenda of imposing its will upon others.  Also incidentally I find the act of faith absurd, but thats not my business.

[opebo]

I want to make prostitution, drug use, and gambling legal. I want to end the anti- smoking legislation and the FCC.

All good positions, none of which is furthered by voting Republican.

Republicans aren't the ones trying to ban smoking from restaurants.

Some Democrats believe in things like drug legalization, but they're rare and far between.

I'll admit that both parties are horrible institutions - or rather they reflect their awful constituencies.. but I'm confident the Democrats are a lesser threat.

[opebo]

Also incidentally I find the act of faith absurd, but thats not my business.

OK, then we won't debate that portion.  

I attack any ideology that is intolerant and has the agenda of imposing its will upon others.

Here, you could make that exact argument for liberalism today.  Liberalism is intolerant other view points, it attacks other view points relentlessly.  And it has an agenda of imposing views on others.  Take for example Affirmative Action, the ones who support it believe that everyone should follow it, and have put that view and action upon us.  If you don't abide by it, you get punished.  Also, for the minorities that do not support Affirmative Action, it is still used on them whether they like it or not.

So you should be attacking liberalism with all your might as well.  Of course, we could also go into Atheism.  With pushing their thoughts and viewpoints on everyone by delcaring that the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional.  It's imposing their views on others who want to say the Pledge, so then you should be attacking Atheists as well.

I could also say the same for libertarianism, conservatism, socialism, communism, and so on.

Liberalism mostly wishes to remove impositions upon the individual, such as the pledge of allegiance to which you allude, or exclusion from marriage, etc.  I agree that in some cases, such as affirmative action, liberals are abominable.  However political christianity is the worst of a bad lot, in that its agenda is far more consistently against individual freedom.

[opebo]

The pledge and marriage don't restrict the individual

Ok.. so you've stated your opinion.  Not very interesting, but I suppose if you enjoyed it, that's all that matters.

If you want to actually interact, you might include some sort of argumentation.

[opebo]

Liberalism mostly wishes to remove impositions upon the individual, such as the pledge of allegiance to which you allude, or exclusion from marriage, etc.  I agree that in some cases, such as affirmative action, liberals are abominable.  However political christianity is the worst of a bad lot, in that its agenda is far more consistently against individual freedom.

To further understand your stance, I would like you to name instances where your case is justified in your opinion.

Gay marriage is the current glaring example.  Another is abortion.  Others include the censorship of media and 'pornography'.  Also much of our long time social interventionism, such as drug laws and laws against prostitution are motivated by religious voters prejudices.  Prohibition was a prime example.  Religion is by nature an intolerant mental condition, and implies that one can know what is right or best for another person.

[opebo]

Opebo - When did you switch to the Democrats? Sorry, I've been away for a while.

A few weeks ago.  I've always been a Republican voter based on a lesser of two evils analysis, and have always had grave reservations about the party's social positions.  I had an epiphany during the anti-gay constitutional referendum amendment here in Missouri, in addition to some other issues.  I realized that the GOP is controlled by the Christian right, and my freedoms are greatly threatened by their agenda.  I wouldn't want to be in the same party as people like that.   The slight impositions Democrats might make on me economically seem like nothing by comparison.

[opebo]

In a few more election cycyles the GOP will become old, and corupt and out of ideas, while during that time the Dems will find new faces and new ideas.

In 1994 the Dems got punted from the House because after 40 years they were just, well, old and tired and corrupt and the GOP had new Ideas and new faces...

Running out of ideas? You kidding me? We haven't even struck down the whole New Deal yet!

The biggest threat to the new Republican majority is ourselves. If we forget who got us where we are, or tie ourselves to the status quo, will will lose Congress, and we will have no one but ourselves to blame.

I don't see any signs of yet, but it's something to look out for.

I agree with all of this Philip. Striking down the New Deal and "Great" Society should be key goals of a Republican Congress and Whitehouse.

Don't you think there's just a slight possibility that impoverishing the bottom 80% of society to Depression-era levels could come back to haunt you?  After all, Americans voted Left once before - when they were desperate.

[opebo]

So was the bottom 80% of society impoverished in the Roaring 20s?

Yes, certainly more so than they were in the 1945-1975 era.  So if your point is that people will put up with a shocking amount of poverty, I certainly agree - obvously they do now.  Of course that poverty reached a desperate level around 1930-31.  What makes you think it won't again?

[opebo]

The poverty rate was nowhere near 80%, even during the darkest depths of the Great Depression.  In his 1936 SOTU speech, FDR pegged the poverty rate at 1/3.  While that is shockingly high, especially by today's standards, it doesn't begin to approach 80%. 

I never said that 80% of the population was poor, I said that 80% of the population was getting poorER due to Republican policies:
http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/ie1.html

Definitions of poverty differ, but there is no doubt that wages and incomes have been in decline for decades for all but the top 20%.  This has, as we all know, been masked by the move over the same time period from single-breadwinner households to two-breadwinner households.